Investment Pitches

Pitch Summary:
@jakebrowatzke presents a detailed long-term valuation-driven bull case for UiPath centered on the success of its Maestro AI agent orchestration platform. The thesis assumes Maestro meaningfully increases product stickiness and monetization of UiPath’s core RPA base, sustaining low-teens core growth while adding a second high-margin ARR engine. Management commentary is used to justify the assumption that Maestro could rival the size of the legacy business within five years. Under the base case, ARR scales to over $4.5B by 2030 with net margins expanding toward software-best-in-class levels. Valuation upside is driven by both earnings growth and multiple expansion as UiPath is re-rated as an AI platform company. Even the bear case still implies a multi-bagger outcome, reinforcing the author’s view that risk/reward is highly asymmetric.

BSD Analysis:
UiPath’s investment case hinges on whether agentic AI orchestration becomes a durable control layer across enterprise workflows rather than a transient feature set. Maestro’s strategic value lies in unifying legacy RPA, AI agents, and third-party tools into a system of record for automation, which could materially raise switching costs and expand share of wallet. The margin expansion thesis is credible given UiPath’s already high gross margins and operating discipline, though sustained top-line reacceleration is required to justify premium multiples. Competitive risk remains from hyperscalers and vertical AI platforms attempting to subsume orchestration within broader stacks. If UiPath establishes Maestro as a standard enterprise orchestration layer, the company could transition from a mature automation vendor into a structurally advantaged AI infrastructure platform.

Actual Post Content:
In our base case, $PATH shareholders earn a 9.2x return in 5 years, making it the best performing asset we model by almost double which is why I'm all in $PATH. Assuming our numbers prove correct $PATH will be worth ~$146.09 a share in 2030 from a price of $15.88 today. Discounting our expected fair value in 2030 by 15% annually, the net present value of $PATH is ~$72.47 TODAY. Our most likely scenario assumes current trends continue and Maestro keeps increasing the sell through and stickiness of all UiPath's invaluable and now AI agent enhanced legacy products like RPA, allowing core business growth to average 12% per year over the next 5 years to about $3.32B in ARR by the end of 2030. Daniel Dines, $PATH's founder and CEO, says he believes Maestro can get as big as the core business within five years. Being conservative, our base case assumes an additional ~$1.2B in ARR from Maestro AI agent orchestration by 2030. Our final estimate is thus $4.53B in high margin ARR exiting 2030. We're thinking that net margins can be as high as 30% within 5 years and continue to improve from there. Long term, even while continuing to invest heavily in R&D and growth, we believe UiPath can become a 40%+ net margin AI company. Based on Graham's fair PE formula, I believe $PATH should trade at a 52 PE in 5 years and thus will be worth ~$146.09 exiting 2030. In our bear case, $PATH has a 3.8x return in 5 years and is worth $60.8 a share in 2030. A 15% discount rate puts our bear case net present value at ~$30.25 TODAY.

URL: https://x.com/jakebrowatzke/status/2008041218358325456

Pitch Summary:
@nitinkinvest argues that Ubiquiti’s perceived growth slowdown is a misdiagnosis driven by supply constraints rather than weakening demand. The thesis centers on the idea that Ubiquiti cannot manufacture enough product to meet demand, which the market is incorrectly interpreting as a demand problem. Inventory data is framed as misleading, masking a mix shift toward higher average selling price products. The author believes consensus expectations are too pessimistic and that upcoming results will challenge the prevailing decline narrative. Product launches and renewed focus on the enterprise and MSP segment are seen as expanding the addressable market beyond what analysts currently model. Structural factors such as a small float and strong operating leverage amplify upside if sentiment shifts. Overall, the pitch is bullish, positioning UI as an asymmetric opportunity where fundamentals and perception are materially misaligned.

BSD Analysis:
Ubiquiti’s business model prioritizes profitability and capital efficiency over maximal availability, which can distort traditional demand signals during periods of constrained supply. Reliance on contract manufacturing introduces capacity rigidity, making rapid ramps difficult when products gain traction, but also supports strong margins and cash generation. The key question for long-term valuation is whether Ubiquiti can broaden its reach into higher-end enterprise networking without diluting its low-cost, high-efficiency culture. Demand indicators such as persistent stockouts, rising search interest, and channel enthusiasm suggest end-market health, but revenue realization remains gated by production planning cycles. Illiquidity and founder ownership add volatility risk, particularly around potential selling. If supply normalizes and sequential growth resumes, earnings power could reassert quickly given operating leverage. The risk case rests on prolonged supply bottlenecks, competitive encroachment, or governance overhangs outweighing the demand tailwind.

Actual Post Content:
Ubiquiti $UI is my highest conviction idea since $DBO.TO, which we covered extensively back in July. The consensus view is that $UI's growth story is dead. In my view, demand is not only robust but still growing. The issue for Ubiquiti is a supply cap, not a demand cap. The market seems to be confusing "can't produce enough" with "can't sell enough." Consensus also appears to be misreading inventory data as a demand stall. I believe the flat inventory QoQ masks a powerful shift to higher AOV products, which should aid this quarter's numbers. Expecting the decline narrative to be proven wrong this year, the risk/reward feels quite asymmetric at the moment. For social arbitrage plays, you just want to hold until the story changes or the market reaches parity learned this the hard way. At the moment, I think this thing should be at least 450p. Analysts are clueless on this one. It will take them at least 18-24 months to catch up with the story. They introduced some important interesting products on their conference in November that MSPs are super excited about. I think they will probably try to tackle the enterprise segment more which is where they have lacked over the last few years. Could open up a massive TAM that no one is factoring in right now. I am honestly just betting on sequential growth to restart and announcements to come through. The float is only around 5% so it’s very illiquid which can move the price very quickly on $UI. The only risk with this one is that the price action could be brutal if Robert Pera decides to sell. $UI's demand dynamics are truly insane.

URL: https://x.com/nitinkinvest/status/2007957721480581394

Pitch Summary:
@MMatters22596 presents Richtech Robotics as a high-upside but high-risk robotics play levered to structural labor shortages. The core bull case is exposure to service robotics adoption across hospitality, healthcare, and industrial end markets where automation demand is accelerating. At the same time, the author is explicit that the stock is volatile and speculative, framing the setup as a conditional opportunity rather than a long-term certainty. The thesis incorporates technical analysis, emphasizing the importance of a clearly defined support level to manage downside risk. The post balances excitement about the company’s positioning with caution around price action and sector risk. Overall, the stance is bullish but tactical, relying on both industry tailwinds and technical confirmation.

BSD Analysis:
Service robotics is an emerging automation segment driven by chronic labor shortages, rising wages, and the need for operational consistency in service-heavy industries. Richtech’s opportunity depends less on headline robotics enthusiasm and more on whether its deployments achieve repeatability, reliability, and acceptable payback periods for customers. Early-stage robotics companies often face margin pressure from hardware costs, integration complexity, and customer support requirements, which can delay operating leverage. Volatility is amplified by thin liquidity, sentiment-driven trading, and limited public operating history. For RR to justify sustained valuation upside, investors will need evidence of unit economics improving alongside expanding installations. The risk/reward profile is asymmetric, but success hinges on execution rather than broad robotics narratives.

Actual Post Content:
$RR Richtech Robotics is probably one of the most exciting robotics stocks currently out there. The company provides service robots, particularly for industries facing severe labor shortages, such as hospitality, healthcare, and industrial services. That said, $RR remains highly volatile and risky, even by robotics-sector standards. From a technical standpoint, the red support line must hold. A breakdown below this level would invalidate my thesis. Your thoughts on $RR? Why can't it be both?

URL: https://x.com/MMatters22596/status/2007927583535689882

Pitch Summary:
@KyleAdamsStocks presents Zeta Global as an execution-driven small-cap software compounder trading well below intrinsic value. The thesis is anchored on management’s history of materially outperforming long-term operating targets across revenue, EBITDA, and free cash flow. Based on the new Zeta 2028 plan, the author outlines a path to over $2B in revenue and substantial free cash flow generation within three years. He argues that even a conservative multiple on forward revenue supports meaningful upside from current levels. Stock-based compensation is acknowledged as a risk, but the downward trend as a percentage of revenue is framed as a key positive differentiator. Overall, the pitch emphasizes margin of safety, strong execution, and asymmetric upside relative to valuation.

BSD Analysis:
Zeta Global sits at the intersection of data-driven marketing, customer intelligence, and verticalized application software, where scale and operating leverage can drive outsized free cash flow if execution holds. The company’s credibility is enhanced by prior plan overdelivery, which reduces discounting of long-term guidance versus typical software issuers. The primary structural risk is competitive intensity in marketing technology, where switching costs vary and pricing power must be continuously defended through performance and data advantages. SBC discipline matters materially given Zeta’s size, but declining dilution trends suggest improving capital efficiency. If revenue growth sustains near guidance while margins expand, valuation compression risk appears limited. The bull case hinges on consistent free cash flow conversion and the market re-rating Zeta from a mid-growth software name to a durable cash compounder.

Actual Post Content:
The more I’m looking into $ZETA the more I like. In 2022, the company announced Zeta 2025, and estimated they would achieve 22% top line, 33% Adjusted EBITDA, and 58% FCF CAGR. They actually did 30% top line, 45% Adjusted EBITDA, and 74% FCF CAGR by 2025. For 2025, they announced Zeta 2028, and believe they will do 20% top line, 28% Adjusted EBITDA, and 39% FCF CAGR. If they just meet guidance, then the company will be at $2.1B Revenue, $525M Adjusted EBITDA, and $340M FCF by 2028. For a <$5B software company in growth mode today that is extremely cheap. I’d argue paying 5X 2028 revenue is more than fair, so would value the company at $10.5B, which is putting the stock close to $45. Seems like a no brainer here. I’ll have to dive more into the short report before starting a position, but I like what I see. Probably my second favorite small cap $1-10B behind $SEZL right now. Looks solid fundamentally - I’ll likely start with a small position. I’m also thinking about buying an initial small position as well. Seems like risk / reward very favorable here. SBC is a common theme with all software companies. The key is the trend. The trend is going down further for Zeta, so I like that. I think there is a good margin of safety and high likelihood it beats the index over the next few years just based off their guidance, which seems conservative considering their execution. Yeah, this was previous without acquisition, so super conservative. Enterprise software always has high SBC. It’s trending down is the most important thing as a total % of revenue. If the trend wasn’t downward I’d be much more concerned. Haven’t bought it yet, but likely will. If it gets there, then I’ll raise my position more. I think $53 is a great entry. My entry was $51.25. I’m expecting triple digits at some point in 2026 as long as the market stays okay.

URL: https://x.com/KyleAdamsStocks/status/2007927172413968513

Pitch Summary:
@YeahDrDave lays out a bear-case framework for SkyWater, arguing the stock’s low sales multiple reflects structural issues rather than market ignorance. He describes SKYT as a specialty, security-accredited domestic foundry, but says investors should understand why it trades more like a low-margin industrial contractor than a premium semiconductor name. The central critique is gross margin: he characterizes the revenue base as “pass-through” economics, especially after adding Fab 25 and its associated low-margin supply arrangement. He also argues the headline growth is acquisition-driven while the legacy business is shrinking, implying weaker organic demand and delayed customer ramps. A major overhang in his view is dependence on government budgets and timing, which introduces forecasting uncertainty that public markets punish. He highlights ongoing dilution risk because fabs require heavy capital investment and the company may need equity financing. Finally, he flags integration and utilization risk at Fab 25 and claims SKYT competes in commoditized legacy-node processes with limited pricing power.

BSD Analysis:
The bear case is fundamentally a “quality of revenue” debate: foundry capacity is valuable, but the market will not pay semiconductor multiples without evidence of durable gross margin and capital efficiency. For SKYT, the key underwriting question is whether Fab 25 and the anchored volume contract serve as a bridge to higher utilization and mix improvement, or permanently weight the model toward low-margin manufacturing. Legacy-node exposure is not inherently fatal—many end markets (aero/defense, industrial, auto) rely on mature processes—but pricing power depends on qualification barriers, reliability, and security accreditation, not node size. Government-linked demand can be attractive but creates lumpiness and working-capital swings; investors should focus on contracted backlog quality and program visibility rather than “reshoring” narratives. Integration risk is real: fixed-cost absorption and yield/throughput execution determine whether the larger footprint amplifies operating leverage or magnifies downside in a demand air pocket. Dilution is a financing strategy question—if incremental capex is paired with credible returns (ROIC) and customer commitments, it can be constructive; if it’s used to fund losses or idle capacity, it is value-destructive. The most decisive KPI set is margin bridge (mix, pricing, utilization), free cash flow after sustaining capex, and evidence that services/engineering work can scale without being labor-constrained. If those metrics don’t inflect, the “industrial contractor” valuation framework may persist.

Actual Post Content:
$SKYT SkyWater - The Bearish Arguments Reasons to stay away SkyWater is the US's only domestic, secure/classified, and pure-play/agnostic chip foundry. It is a specialty foundry focused on an ever expanding array of advanced use cases in collaboration with its many customers. It is not a foundry that just churns out millions of iPhone chips. If all of that might interest you then first read the introductory highlights in the quoted post below. This however is going to be the bearish points. Stay tuned for the bullish counterpoints. Even with the recent run up, $SKYT is still trading at ~1.4x sales Other industries valued at 1.4x sales: -Food Processing -Trucking -Property and Casualty Insurance Meanwhile the rest of the Semiconductor industry trades at 8x-15x sales. $SKYT is valued at 1/8th the rest of the industry. Why is the market valuing this chip company like a trucking fleet? 1. "Grocery Store" Gross Margins This is the single biggest red flag. In the semi world, a "good" company (like TSMC or Texas Instruments) has gross margins of 50% or higher. They sell a chip for $10 that costs $5 to make. SkyWater meanwhile has their gross margins historically hovering in the 15% - 20% range. The bears would argue that they are just "passing through" revenue with very little profit kept. For example, they just acquired a new mega factory in Texas called Fab 25. With it they got a $300M revenue deal. The $300M revenue bump from Fab 25 (the Infineon deal) is revenue that is a low-margin supply agreement. The market values $1 of low-margin revenue much less than $1 of high-margin revenue. They are valued like a grocery store (low margin), not a chip company (high margin). 2. The "Legacy" Business is Shrinking While the headlines scream "Record Revenue" (due to the Fab 25 acquisition), the organic core business is shrinking. In Q3 2025, "Legacy SkyWater" revenue actually declined 32% year-over-year. The bearish argument is that the company is masking a declining core business by buying a new factory (Fab 25) to show "growth." If you strip away the acquisition, the original business is shrinking because government programs are delayed and commercial customers are slow to ramp. 3. The Government Drag Bears would say that SkyWater’s entire thesis rests on government funding (CHIPS Act, DoD contracts), which is notoriously unreliable for public market investors. Management frequently cites "budget delays" or "continuing resolutions" (Congress not passing a budget) as reasons for missing revenue targets. This leads to unpredictability. You cannot model "when Congress will sign a check" in an Excel spreadsheet. Wall Street hates this unpredictability and discounts the stock heavily because of it. 4. Perpetual Dilution Risk SkyWater is cash-hungry. Building and upgrading fabs costs billions, but they only have millions in cash. The bears fear that to fund the necessary upgrades for all of these fancy technologies (Fan-Out Packaging, Carbon Nanotubes), they will likely need to sell more stock. Every time the stock price pops, investors fear a secondary offering is coming, which creates a "ceiling" on the stock price. 5. Integration Risks (Fab 25) Taking over a massive legacy factory (Fab 25 in Texas) is dangerous. The bears would point out that a fab has massive fixed costs (electricity, water, 24/7 labor). If that $300M revenue from Infineon ever dips, or if they can't fill the rest of the factory with new customers quickly, the factory becomes a massive money pit that could bankrupt the company. There is also the risk of a culture clash. Merging their existing nimble R&D lab culture (Minnesota) with a high-volume legacy factory (Texas) may lead to operational inefficiencies. 6. They Sell "Old Tech" While Nvidia fights for 3nm, SkyWater lives in the 90nm, 130nm, and 65nm world. Bears argue these "legacy nodes" are commodities. There is massive global capacity for older chips (especially from China dumping legacy chips), meaning SkyWater has zero pricing power unless the government explicitly bails them out. "They aren't inventing the future; they are maintaining the past." 7. No Real Profits (GAAP) Forget EBITDA adjustments. On a GAAP basis, the company has struggled to show consistent earnings per share. Bears argue that until the company proves it can generate real cash flow after paying for its massive CapEx, it’s just a "science project" funded by shareholder dilution. Summary: The Market is saying: "We don't believe you can scale." Until Gross Margins break 30% and organic growth returns, $SKYT belongs in the "Industrial Contractor" bucket, not the "AI Semiconductor" bucket. Bullish counterpoints coming soon. However, if you invested in $SKYT (or were about to) without knowing at least some of the above then are you just investing off of vibes? We all need to dig deeper when putting our hard earned money at risk. It builds conviction or avoids costly mistakes and is necessary to weather the market noise. I cut out some of the arguably less critical or straw man bearish arguments to avoid being long winded. Feel free to comment other bearish points I didn't include. Also comment any rebuttals you've found to these points. Fair warning, copy paste AI slop might get you blocked. Hey thanks for the encouragement. My pleasure. They are definitely adding a significant amount of new capacity.

URL: https://x.com/YeahDrDave/status/2007871152195248457

Pitch Summary:
Alphabet – We bought shares in September 2021 at US$134, representing about 27 times earnings. After witnessing society’s shift online during COVID, I believed Google and YouTube would continue to grow profits. Artificial intelligence later became a major narrative, and Alphabet’s stock experienced volatility as investors debated winners. Today it appears Google’s AI platform, Gemini, is well positioned versus competitors. The stock has risen to roughly US$314, representing about 29 times earnings. I feel the company should continue to grow profits by increasingly monetizing its many touch points impacting daily life.

BSD Analysis:
Alphabet remains one of the most dominant cash-flow machines ever built, even as investors obsess over disruption narratives. Search is still default behavior for billions, and AI enhances monetization rather than replacing it. YouTube has matured into a multi-engine business spanning ads, subscriptions, and creator monetization. Google Cloud is no longer a science project — profitability changes the earnings profile materially. Regulatory pressure is constant, but user behavior hasn’t meaningfully shifted. Capital discipline has improved through buybacks and cost control. The balance sheet provides absurd optionality for AI investment. This is not a melting ice cube. It’s a tollbooth adapting faster than critics admit.

Pitch Summary:
Jardine Matheson – It is a large and diversified family-run business focused mainly on Greater China and Southeast Asia. We bought it for US$51 in September 2021, trading at roughly 11 times earnings. Today it trades for $68 at approximately 12 times earnings. More than a quarter of our gains have come from dividends. I believe our investment gives us well-managed diversification at an attractive valuation.

BSD Analysis:
Jardine Matheson is a sprawling Asian holding company that looks messy on the surface but quietly compounds through asset quality and geography. Its exposure spans consumer, retail, property, and automotive across faster-growing Asian economies, where formalization and middle-class growth still matter. Investors fixate on the complexity and conglomerate discount and miss the durability of cash flows underneath. Capital allocation has become more disciplined, with less empire building and more balance-sheet repair. Asset backing provides downside protection that doesn’t show up in quarterly earnings optics. Cycles hit individual subsidiaries unevenly, which is exactly why the portfolio structure works. Political and regional noise is constant, but the assets keep earning. This is patient Asian capital trading at a discount because it refuses to simplify for optics.

Pitch Summary:
Ryanair – This is the largest airline in Europe. We bought Ryanair's American Depository Shares in September 2021 at around US$45. At the time, the airline was still losing money from the COVID-19 pandemic, but it previously had consistently strong profitability. The price represented only 16 times what the airline earned back in 2018. The airline had an excellent balance sheet. The ADS now trade at around US$73, representing roughly 14 times earnings. I feel the airline will continue using its low-cost competitive advantage to grow by stealing market share from weaker airlines.

BSD Analysis:
Ryanair’s moat is ruthless cost leadership paired with scale across European short-haul routes. It competes on price so aggressively that weaker airlines effectively subsidize its dominance. Demand is cyclical, but Ryanair usually exits downturns stronger than it entered. Labor relations and regulatory friction are constant background noise. Pricing power exists through cost advantage, not brand affection. Aircraft order discipline and fleet economics matter more than marketing. The bull case is continued share gains as Europe consolidates. The bear case is fuel shocks or regulatory intervention compressing margins. Ryanair wins by being structurally cheaper than everyone else—every day.

Pitch Summary:
Brenntag – This is the largest distributor of chemicals globally. After Univar was taken private, we rolled proceeds into Brenntag shares at around €75 per share, representing roughly 12 times earnings. The chemicals industry was coming off a COVID high, and pricing, volumes, and margins declined. Now Brenntag shares trade around €49, representing roughly 13 times earnings. I still like the investment idea and the company, including their new CEO. I think their earnings could be temporarily depressed, but we have not yet added to our position.

BSD Analysis:
Brenntag’s moat is scale distribution and logistics complexity in chemicals that customers don’t want to manage themselves. The business looks boring until you realize switching distributors is operationally painful. Margins are thin, which makes execution discipline everything. End markets are cyclical, and volume softness shows up quickly. Pricing power is limited, but service reliability protects share. Portfolio simplification has improved focus, but growth remains incremental. The bull case is steady industrial recovery with operational leverage. The bear case is prolonged demand weakness exposing thin margins. Brenntag compounds quietly when nothing breaks.

Pitch Summary:
Builders FirstSource – This is the largest supplier of building materials in the United States. They sell lumber and prefabricated products such as trusses and millwork to homebuilders, often helping builders improve efficiency. We bought a small amount of stock in 2024 at US$149 per share, representing approximately 12 times earnings. Lumber prices and home building activity are cyclical, and both declined from post-COVID highs. The stock is currently trading at US$105, about 17 times earnings. I believe the company will benefit from continued industry consolidation, though earnings may be temporarily depressed.

BSD Analysis:
Builders FirstSource’s moat is scale and integration in supplying professional homebuilders, not brand or pricing power. Value-added components improve margins, but housing cycles still dominate outcomes. Operating leverage works violently in both directions. Consolidation has improved industry structure, but it didn’t repeal cyclicality. Inventory and working capital discipline decide whether downturns hurt or cripple returns. Pricing power disappears quickly when housing slows. The bull case is a housing recovery with continued share gains and margin resilience. The bear case is prolonged affordability pressure crushing volumes. BLDR is a quality cyclical—timing matters more than narrative.

Pitch Summary:
Intel – I owned shares of this large American semiconductor microchip manufacturer previously. We bought shares around US$55 when Greenfield started managing investments in September 2021, representing roughly 13 times earnings. I knew Intel was struggling with market share losses to AMD and Nvidia, but I thought the company would at least maintain profitability and balance sheet strength. Suddenly, it became clear to me that the CEO was willing to decimate the company’s profitability, dividend, and balance sheet in his effort to improve competitive standing. Immediately upon this realization in January 2023, I decided to sell our shares around US$27. In retrospect my timing was far from ideal, but I have always felt my decision to sell was the correct one. Today Intel's stock trades at US$39, representing roughly 87 times earnings.

BSD Analysis:
Intel’s moat used to be manufacturing leadership; today it’s incumbency and customer inertia. Execution failures shattered the perception of inevitability and handed share to nimbler competitors. Foundry ambitions are strategically important but brutally capital intensive and late to market. Margins are under pressure from both competition and heavy capex. Government support helps finance the rebuild but doesn’t guarantee success. Product roadmaps look better, yet credibility must be re-earned over multiple cycles. The bull case is successful process catch-up restoring relevance across CPUs and foundry. The bear case is structural underperformance masked by subsidies. Intel is a turnaround measured in years, not quarters.

Pitch Summary:
Power Corporation of Canada – This is the holding company controlled by Montréal's Desmarais family. It holds many investments, but its largest asset is Great-West Lifeco, one of the largest insurance companies in Canada. I have owned shares in this company for almost 20 years. When Greenfield started managing money in September 2021, we bought the stock for $42. The stock continued to languish for a few years, and we added to positions several times. Since August 2024, the stock moved up significantly to about $72. Despite the rise, it still trades for about 12 times earnings. Roughly 20% of our return from Power Corp. came from their dividends. We continue to own shares. I feel the company should continue to benefit from their customers in Canada, America, and Europe saving for retirement.

BSD Analysis:
Power Corp is a holding-company ecosystem built around financial services, insurance, and asset management rather than operating brilliance. The moat is control, capital permanence, and access—not transparency or speed. Value is concentrated in a handful of platforms, which makes capital allocation far more important than reported earnings. Discounts to NAV persist because realization is optional and governance is layered. The group structure adds stability but also dilutes accountability for returns. Dividends are reliable, but growth depends on management judgment across cycles. The bull case is patient compounding with disciplined capital recycling and buybacks. The bear case is a permanent conglomerate discount with limited catalysts. Power Corp rewards patience, not impatience.

Pitch Summary:
McKesson – This is a pharmaceutical distribution company, operating mainly in the United States. I followed their industry for many years. I first bought the stock for US$144 in the spring of 2018 when many investors worried the company would be permanently damaged by liabilities stemming from the opioid crisis in the United States. We later bought the stock for US$205 when Greenfield started managing money in September 2021, representing roughly 10 times earnings. The stock has climbed steadily to US$824 today, which works out to roughly 20 times earnings. We have trimmed the position size but continue to own shares today. I see the investment similar to a royalty on Americans taking more pharmaceuticals over time.

BSD Analysis:
McKesson sits at the least glamorous but most powerful choke point in U.S. healthcare: drug distribution. Scale is the moat — pharmacies and manufacturers can complain, but they can’t bypass McKesson without breaking the system. Margins are thin by design, yet cash flow is massive because volume and velocity do the work. Specialty pharma and oncology distribution add higher-quality growth on top of the utility core. Regulatory noise never disappears, but it usually entrenches incumbents rather than disrupts them. Capital allocation has improved meaningfully, with buybacks doing real work. This is not a healthcare innovation story. It’s healthcare plumbing with monopoly-like characteristics. McKesson compounds because the system depends on it functioning.

Pitch Summary:
Heidelberg Materials – I followed this global cement company for many years, but only first bought the stock around the time Greenfield started managing money in September 2021. The stock had been falling when we purchased it around €65, representing about 8 times earnings. It continued to fall and in April 2022 I wrote a blog about the industry. The stock continued falling all the way to about €40 in September 2022, equating to just 5 times earnings. Since then, the stock has been on a steady climb to €222 or about 17 times earnings, making it our highest contributing investment. We trimmed the stock a few times, but it remains a large investment. I believe the company will benefit from investment in and upgrading of infrastructure around the world. New bridges, highways, dams, tunnels, airports, ports, pipes, and railways require a lot of cement.

BSD Analysis:
Heidelberg Materials is a global heavyweight in cement and aggregates — industries where local monopolies quietly rule. Infrastructure spending, urbanization, and energy transition projects keep demand structurally intact. Pricing power exists because transport costs make markets regional and competition irrational. Carbon regulation creates cost pressure, but it also raises barriers for new entrants. Capital intensity is high, yet replacement economics protect returns. Management has been disciplined about portfolio cleanup and balance-sheet strength. This is not a green-washing story. It’s materials infrastructure benefiting from a world that keeps building. When construction cycles normalize, Heidelberg prints cash.

Pitch Summary:
Healthcare has been out of favor in recent years, weighed down by post-Covid headwinds, but we find the highly regulated sector to be structurally attractive given growing demand and significant barriers to entry. With a market cap around $6.5 billion, Bio-Rad Laboratories is smaller than our typical investment, but the company dominates the niches it serves within the areas of life-science research and diagnostics. Vertical integration historically has resulted in strong recurring revenue for the company, and its diversified customer base has further supported stability. Notably, Bio-Rad maintains a one-third stake in German biopharma company Sartorius that has grown significantly since its purchase and provides Bio-Rad with an economic exposure beyond its core businesses. Founded in a Quonset hut in 1952 by a husband-wife pair of Cal Berkeley graduates and run by their son since 2003, Bio-Rad maintains a family orientation that aligns interests with shareholders and contributes to the long-term orientation we look for in management teams.

BSD Analysis:
Bio-Rad is a niche-dominant life sciences tools company with recurring revenue, high switching costs, and strong barriers to entry. The embedded value of its Sartorius stake adds hidden asset value not fully reflected in the share price. Healthcare’s regulatory complexity favors incumbents with scale and expertise, supporting long-term cash flow durability. Family-led governance aligns capital allocation with long-term value creation. Upside catalysts include recovery in life science spending and monetization or revaluation of the Sartorius stake. Risks include prolonged funding pressure in research budgets.

Pitch Summary:
Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Corporation (TSMC) is by far the world’s largest semiconductor foundry and is the primary manufacturer of the next-gen chips used in generative AI by customers like Apple, Nvidia and Intel. The company maintains a 60%-plus share of a market that is projected to experience continued strong growth. TSMC’s scale helps it to continually reinforce its advantaged market position, generating significant revenues that the company reinvests into research and design and capex. Strong cash flows have enabled TSMC to maintain attractive dividend levels over time, resulting in attractive total returns for a stock we first purchased in 2018.

BSD Analysis:
TSMC is positioned at the center of the global AI and advanced computing supply chain, with unmatched scale and process leadership. Its dominant market share creates barriers to entry that are effectively insurmountable for competitors. Heavy reinvestment sustains technology leadership and long-term pricing power, while robust free cash flow supports dividends. Valuation is supported by secular growth rather than cyclical demand alone. Key risks include geopolitical tensions and semiconductor cycle volatility, but strategic importance provides resilience.

Pitch Summary:
On October 6th, Endurance Gold Corp. (EDG:TSXV, BUY $0.50 Target) reported notable assay results from four recent drill holes at its fully owned Reliance Gold Project in British Columbia.
On November 6th, the Company released six additional drill results from the Crown Zone at its Reliance Project.

BSD Analysis:
Endurance Gold is an exploration-focused company with projects in stable jurisdictions. Exploration success is uncertain and slow. Financing cycles dictate progress more than geology alone. Management discipline affects dilution outcomes. The bull case is a discovery that attracts capital. The bear case is incremental results that fail to excite. There is no cash flow safety net. Investors are underwriting optionality. Endurance is a time-and-patience trade.